If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Could they be tried under the Geneva convention? No, they have agreed to abide by it in spite of the detainee's not being qualified for POW status.

There is no illegal activity to try them for as has been suggested. How can someone be in legal jeopardy for something that is not illegal, you may think it should be, that doesn't change anything though.

Disagree with you here. The Supreme Court has given the detainees protection under Article 3 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. I don't think it matters what status they are or what you call them, It appears that the decision is clear in that anyone under our custody should be treated humanely.
No matter what anyone says about waterboarding it is considered torture. People have been prosecuted for doing it and just because some Justice deptartment lawyers said it wasn't doesn't mean it isn't.

With this in mind and the recently disclosures by VP Cheney that he was aware of the waterboarding and coordinated it's use, I do think he is in some legal hot water. Will it happen? Probably not. Should it happen? I think it should.

I think the liberals have made it clear that anything we do to actually try to win this Global War on Terrorism is off limits. We are fighting a war against animals who would like nothing more then to detonate a nuclear device in a major US city. They are actively trying to obtain WMD's to use against your family and mine. They have people in place within our borders and the funds to acquire the weapons. There are most likely people in possession of these weapons that are willing to sell them to terrorist. With all that stacked against us you are worried that some of these people are not getting all the rights you think they have coming to them. And seem to want to give them the same rights a citizen of the US has. You would like to tie the hands of anyone who has a job that involves the security of our country. No racial profiling even though in nearly every instance perpetrators of terrorist attacks fit an absolute profile. When we do happen to capture one you want to treat them like they were arrested for outstanding parking tickets not plotting to kill thousands of Americans or our allies. If someone wants to kill my family and is actively pursuing ways to do I don't give a rats ass about him or his rights. They sure as hell don't care about mine. My family and country are to important to me to risk worrying about the comfort of some piece of crap terrorist. I also believe that some on this board would like to see us leave Iraq defeated so their opposition to the war would be justified

I think the liberals have made it clear that anything we do to actually try to win this Global War on Terrorism is off limits.

This is just a broad generalization. Fact is there are many different ways to win the war on terror.I don't recall anyone complaining out about Tactical missile strikes on Al qaeda or the Carpet bombing of the caves in Afghanistan or the Marines going door to door in Fallujah to rid the area of terrorists

We are fighting a war against animals who would like nothing more then to detonate a nuclear device in a major US city. They are actively trying to obtain WMD's to use against your family and mine. They have people in place within our borders and the funds to acquire the weapons. There are most likely people in possession of these weapons that are willing to sell them to terrorist.

A realistic risk assessment of that would find that the odds of such an occurrence are low. Are risk of Nuclear attack were much higher during the cold war when the Soviets had thousands of nuclear war heads targeted for the US. Saying this in my opinion is a way to justify breaking laws.

With all that stacked against us you are worried that some of these people are not getting all the rights you think they have coming to them. And seem to want to give them the same rights a citizen of the US has. You would like to tie the hands of anyone who has a job that involves the security of our country.

I have never advocated giving them the same rights as a US citizen. That's an exaggeration. I do believe they should get what rights are entitled to them. No more no less.

No racial profiling even though in nearly every instance perpetrators of terrorist attacks fit an absolute profile.

Not sure what your getting at here.

When we do happen to capture one you want to treat them like they were arrested for outstanding parking tickets not plotting to kill thousands of Americans or our allies

Not true see above.

.

If someone wants to kill my family and is actively pursuing ways to do I don't give a rats ass about him or his rights.

Your entitiled to your opionion, I just don't agree.

I also believe that some on this board would like to see us leave Iraq defeated so their opposition to the war would be justified

Doubt that very much.

My point in all of this is that when we have laws we need to follow them. I believe in the rule of law with a passion and feel that it is if not the most important virtue then it is certainly close and this is what separates us from Terrorists. When we cross the line we just get closer to them. I don't want to be anywhere near them so it is important to follow the rules no matter how emotionally unsatisfying it is.

The statements by CIA officials seem contrary to recent statements by Cheney and others in the Bush administration.

The abu ghraib incident and the acceptance of torture in this "war on terror" are below the historic principles and dignity of this country (ask John McCain). They have surely been great recruiting tools for the various factions against America. In no way does taking this low road make us safer in the long run. It recruits more terrorists, alienates our friends, and puts our soldiers and citizens in foreign nations more at risk. There are alternative methods to get the same information from prisoners without these risks.

Hoosier, nice try to imply that those of us who have a different point of view don't care about our families and country as much as you do.

As the sands run out on the Bush administration and the nation looks to the incoming Obama White House with a combination of apprehension for the future and a desire to put the past behind us, there remains some unfinished business that is so fraught with political danger and so heavy with symbolism regarding how we Americans see ourselves that the political elites in Washington are reluctant to address it.

I am talking about the whole matter of detainee abuse and whether those who specifically ordered it and carried it out should be punished.